Simon Geard wrote: > On Sun, 2012-11-11 at 10:56 +0100, Armin K. wrote: >> I have no problems with it either, but LFS/BLFS people seem to reject >> systemd (for now). > > Understandable. I like the concept, but it's not exactly ideal from the > point of view of a project trying to teach people how their system works > - the traditional shell scripts might be kind of messy, but they're much > more transparent. And of course, it's not all that hard (last time I > tried, at least) to convert an LFS system to systemd.
What advantages does systemd give? Binary logs? That's a little difficult to work with if Xorg isn't working. How do you grep a binary log? cgroups? What advantages does that give to a single user workstation? A dedicated LAMP server? Factor those systems out and how many systems are left? Fast bootup? I've got my system down to less than 8 seconds. Shutdown is about 4 seconds. The reason for commercial system boot problems is because they want one system to boot any hardware. That means hundreds (thousands?) of modules. Note that boot time is also a function of hardware. On a virtual system like kvm, boot time from grub to login prompt is about 2 seconds! When I complained once about systemd on a list that the devs read, they asked why there was a problem understanding systemd. After all there was 100 pages of documentation. I replied that that problem was that 100 pages of documentation were needed. There is a balanced discussion at http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/what-are-the-advantages-disadvantages-of-using-systemd-versus-sysvinit-4175422544/ -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
